In that case, all this 'bipartisanship' talk makes me worry he'll let the plutocrats walk all over him in the name of unity. It's too early to tell, of course. The problem is, I'm guilty of being a little star struck by the dude and his speeches and advisors and stuff, so I'm probably missing important defects. So maybe that's a flaw, too.

i actually wish people would take this thread seriously; i didnt realize it wasnt about electability & i think the answer is probably the same either way (we dont know yet), but even tho im behind the guy 100% & have been for months my gut says myself & probably a lot of people here are gonna be dissatisfied with him 4-8 years down the road. a discussion of concrete reasons why this might be so seems worthwhile to me

foreign policy naivete. biggest thing that worries me about him by far. if he gets elected, pulls us out of iraq, closes gitmo, and restores civil liberties to their pre-9/11 status, and then ta-da something actually blows up, how many times is he going to say "uh um" during the press conference in which he capitulates to the chickenhawks in both parties screaming for his head

if he gets elected, pulls us out of iraq, closes gitmo, and restores civil liberties to their pre-9/11 status, and then ta-da something actually blows up, how many times is he going to say "uh um" during the press conference in which he capitulates to the chickenhawks in both parties screaming for his head

It's hard to see how staying in Iraq is helping to prevent domestic terrorism. Even McCain wants to close Gitmo. I doubt civil liberties will go all the way back to pre-9/11 status, and not sure if Obama is even suggesting that they should

foreign policy naivete. biggest thing that worries me about him by far. if he gets elected, pulls us out of iraq, closes gitmo, and restores civil liberties to their pre-9/11 status, and then ta-da something actually blows up, how many times is he going to say "uh um" during the press conference in which he capitulates to the chickenhawks in both parties screaming for his head

i wonder about his ability/willingness to get his hands dirty and wrestle things to the ground. saying you're willing to talk to iran/hamas/whoever is all well and good, but if you go into those situations you have to go in saying, "here's the deal: you can get this and this, you can't get this and this, and we're going to have to fight about this and this -- but if the fight goes on too long, you get nothing." the bushies have been terrible at that stuff, so it's not like the bar is set particularly high, but it would be nice to have someone who can actually get some things done. (wouldn't have to be him personally, but he'd need some hardball players around who knew how to do that.) (same applies in dealing with congress, obviously.)

his uh um uh tic that he has when you can tell he's thinking on his feet

this doesn't bother me so much -- it's campaign season and he has to be excruciatingly calculating about his diction. when he speaks off the cuff he gets in trouble, but really only because he running for office

isnt this precisely cuz its easy to paint him as a pussy/pushover, which you guys all seem to be buying into?? i think hes far from either of those things. and i dont mean to draw this into electability issues, just that im more interested in what might be lurking behind the 'optimist' facade

The Bush adminstration has done so much to restore if not empower the executive branch that I doubt President McCain, Clinton, or Obama would be so eager to rescind those powers -- why would you?

I wish he was an atheist -- with his oratorical skills he could do lots for the millions of us who want to hear a convincing defense of godlessness put to theists. And yet, and yet, I suspect he IS less of a god-fearing man than he pretends. Something about his preternatural coolness bespeaks a kind of deism.

^^^. The right wing has been all "SEE? SEE? AUDACITY OF HOPE MY ASS!" the last couple of weeks; they've accepted the narrative that Obama is a New Kind of Politician. To me he's "new" only in that he understands the importance of words and is uncommonly quick-witted.

yeah i dunno if thats directed at me or not but i agree -- im not saying i dont believe the guy isnt genuinely optimistic, but i def dont believe he's remotely naive, like not even remotely remotely xps to jhoshea

More on Obama & civil liberties: he voted to make permanent all but two of the PATRIOT act provisions that had been originally passed with an expiration date - so not exactly a wide-eyed innocent on that front.

i mean, this guy is naive?? he comes across as a freaking borderline genius to me

Early on I thought he came off as naive when he said that having lived abroad was a foreign policy credential. Like not only naive for thinking that (which he might not have, really), but naive for thinking it sounded good.

probably -- i don't know much about carter, but i can't imagine him being quite so detail oriented.

obama's obviously brilliant, and a better writer than i am obviously, but he's not a great speechwriter IMO. when giving proper speeches, he seldom has the quality of pith, and i can't think of many phrases in his speeches that are particularly memorable. the phrase "the soft bigotry of low expectations" that some hack put in GWB's mouth is more memorable than anything BHO has said... it's got assonance, a nice rhythm, parallelism....

I want to be open to the idea that the approach taken with Al Qaeda and ISIS has been a calculation relative to the amount of death of suffering that's been possible. Maybe I should be, but I'm still not entirely convinced that the offensive approach taken ultimately results in more death and suffering than what is possible if they are left alone.

sorry to post-police but morbs "horrifying revive" would have been a totally hilarious standalone post and would have actually focused yr message but instead you went personal-attack. I am available to edit ppl's posts and my rates are reasonable

it wasn't much of an "attack"-- it was just an acknowledgment that i had indeed expected a morbs response, and that he did not disappoint. the response to that seemed like a significant escalation to me, but others may disagree.

i guess if this were a school playground--and i'm not sure it differs much from one sometimes--i would be told to simply "ignore" him. and that would be good advice! a bit harder to take after repeated "you need to die" posts though.

Listening to Obama speak the other night made me feel proud to be an American. He always strikes me as a very moral and wise person, able to see how individual policies relate to a larger vision/pattern. His endorsement of Hillary made me like her more.

I do wonder if Clinton is intending to counter that policy but doesn't want to position herself against Obama at this point in time. She seemed to hammer home her intention to curb mass deportations in her speech last night. But, yes, it's fucked up (particularly since there are reported instances of deportees being murdered upon returning to their home countries) and I hope that she sees that.

1. explain that laws are dumb and should be changed2. get shouted down3. make executive decision to not enforce all parts of dumb laws4. get shouted down more5. enforce dumb laws to the very letter6. reform vote now louder than ever